Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Search Result

Collapse
121 results in 0.0181 seconds.
Keywords
Members
Tags
  •  

  • Garry Wroe
    replied to Hutchinson: Deposition Revisited

    Hutchinson was there, Jon. He knew who he had and had not seen, and therefore who might confirm or disconfirm his story. There was no requirement for him to second-guess anyone.

    The essence of his story was that he had sighted Kelly and Astrakhan, had followed them as far as Miller’s...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Garry Wroe
    replied to Hutchinson: Deposition Revisited

    Probably not, Caz. But he would have done had he thought it unlikely at the time that Sarah had either seen or recognized him....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Garry Wroe
    replied to Hutchinson: Deposition Revisited

    The reality, Jon, is that Hutchinson needed only to see Sarah entering or leaving the inquest venue in order for it to have dawned on him that she was an official police witness. Given that the Lewis narrative had yet to appear in print, he could have had no idea that the two most important elements...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Garry Wroe
    replied to Hutchinson: Deposition Revisited

    Ah, the ‘implication’. It might be an idea, Caz, if in future you were to base your comments on what I’ve written rather than on what you wish I’d written.


    Again, misattribution. I never stated that investigators ‘forgot’ about Hutchinson’s ‘loitering’. I said:...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Garry Wroe
    replied to Hutchinson: Deposition Revisited

    You presume a lot of things, Caz.


    There’s that ‘shades of grey’ thinking again.

    Do you really need me to tell you that there isn’t the slightest evidence to suggest that Hutchinson came forward ‘after learning he had been seen directly outside Kelly's room...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Garry Wroe
    replied to Hutchinson: Deposition Revisited

    Whilst I’m sure there are people out there who are able to make sense of this sentence, Caz, I’m not one of them.


    Since anticipation is a perceptual abstract that is not contingent on a physical outcome, your statement makes no logical sense.


    If Hutchinson’s...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Garry Wroe
    replied to Hutchinson: Deposition Revisited

    Likely being the operative word, Hunter. You may well be correct, but the only credible description investigators had available to them at the time was that of Mrs Long’s middle-aged ‘foreigner’, which may have been compatible with Violenia’s physical appearance, if not his actual age....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Garry Wroe
    replied to Hutchinson: Deposition Revisited

    I knew exactly what you meant, Caz.


    My case against Hutchinson? You appear to be labouring under the delusion that I’m accusing Hutchinson of murder. I’m not, and have never done so. And nor would I in the absence of any conclusive proof.


    Had you presented...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Garry Wroe
    replied to Hutchinson: Deposition Revisited

    The authorities were undoubtedly aware, Roy, that certain offenders had in the past attempted to claim the reward posted on their own crimes by coming forward and implicating perfectly innocent individuals. This, in point of fact, is why the policy of posting rewards was abandoned in 1884. Given...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Garry Wroe
    replied to Hutchinson: Deposition Revisited

    Well, Caz, if that is meant to imply that I don’t indulge in unsupported flights of fancy, I’ll take it as a compliment.


    I have ‘trouble’ with any thinking that plays fast and loose with the evidence.


    I don’t ‘cope well’ with someone making a statement,...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Garry Wroe
    replied to Hutchinson: Deposition Revisited

    Yes, Jon, I remember it well. That was the one where you not only claimed to know the unpublished thoughts of Anderson, but cited these unsupported assumptions as fact.


    To the police, according to the man from The Echo.


    Fabricated? Ah, yes, Jon, I was...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Garry Wroe
    replied to Hutchinson: Deposition Revisited

    Bold assertion? Well, Caz, it might have been had I actually made it. But since I didn’t it represents yet one more example of misattribution on your part.


    You neither mentioned nor implied any such scenario. In fact, you only referred to Barnett in order to bolster your...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Garry Wroe
    replied to Hutchinson: Deposition Revisited
    Sorry, Jon, but I've clarified my position with regard to Mrs Kennedy and there's nothing more I can add without resorting to repetition....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Garry Wroe
    replied to Hutchinson: Deposition Revisited

    You’re seeing complexity where none existed, I’m afraid, Caz.


    It shows nothing of the sort. There was never a suspicion amongst investigators that the Kelly murder was unconnected to the Ripper series. Barnett was questioned at length in accordance with standard police procedure...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Garry Wroe
    replied to Hutchinson: Deposition Revisited
    Except, Jon, that Mrs Kennedy did not live in Miller’s Court. She also claimed to have arrived at the court at three o’clock, in which case she couldn’t have heard the scream an hour earlier.


    Well, how about your assertion that Mrs Kennedy used the name Lewis when speaking to the...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X